| Autor: |
Ruano J; Department of Dermatology, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain., Aguilar-Luque M; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain., Gómez-Garcia F; Department of Dermatology, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain., Alcalde Mellado P; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain.; School of Medicine, University of Cordoba, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain., Gay-Mimbrera J; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain., Carmona-Fernandez PJ; Department of Dermatology, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain., Maestre-López B; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain.; School of Medicine, University of Cordoba, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain., Sanz-Cabanillas JL; Department of Dermatology, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain., Hernández Romero JL; Department of Dermatology, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain., González-Padilla M; Department of Dermatology, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain., Vélez García-Nieto A; Department of Dermatology, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain., Isla-Tejera B; Instituto Maimonides de Investigación Biomédica de Córdoba (IMIBIC)/Reina Sofía University Hospital/University of Córdoba, Menendez Pidal Ave, 14004 Cordoba, Spain.; Department of Pharmacy, Reina Sofía University Hospital, Menéndez Pidal Ave, 14004 Córdoba, Spain. |
| Abstrakt: |
Researchers are increasingly using on line social networks to promote their work. Some authors have suggested that measuring social media activity can predict the impact of a primary study (i.e., whether or not an article will be highly cited). However, the influence of variables such as scientific quality, research disclosures, and journal characteristics on systematic reviews and meta-analyses has not yet been assessed. The present study aims to describe the effect of complex interactions between bibliometric factors and social media activity on the impact of systematic reviews and meta-analyses about psoriasis (PROSPERO 2016: CRD42016053181). Methodological quality was assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool. Altmetrics, which consider Twitter, Facebook, and Google+ mention counts as well as Mendeley and SCOPUS readers, and corresponding article citation counts from Google Scholar were obtained for each article. Metadata and journal-related bibliometric indices were also obtained. One-hundred and sixty-four reviews with available altmetrics information were included in the final multifactorial analysis, which showed that social media and impact factor have less effect than Mendeley and SCOPUS readers on the number of cites that appear in Google Scholar. Although a journal's impact factor predicted the number of tweets (OR, 1.202; 95% CI, 1.087-1.049), the years of publication and the number of Mendeley readers predicted the number of citations in Google Scholar (OR, 1.033; 95% CI, 1.018-1.329). Finally, methodological quality was related neither with bibliometric influence nor social media activity for systematic reviews. In conclusion, there seems to be a lack of connectivity between scientific quality, social media activity, and article usage, thus predicting scientific success based on these variables may be inappropriate in the particular case of systematic reviews. |
